A political leader that attempts to gather a following by telling people that they are not special, but are animals in ecological relationship with the rest of life and must live accordingly has a poor chance of success. The cynical message that "you are great and right, and should have everything that you want" is a much easier sell. With an monumental irony that message is used on the "under classes" to make the message true for the elites. There seems to be nothing coming -- other than economic and environmental collapse -- to challenge this trajectory.
And you still think this has anything to do with partisan politics....? Wake up and smell the sewer. No politician can tell the truth, even if they had even the vaguest notion of it.
Klare is 100% correct when he says that environmentalists need to learn a lot more about geopolitics.
Geopolitics is probably the least understood issue in America.
Which is why we continue to find ourselves in deeper and deeper s***.
We allow our "leaders" to take care of the rest of the world because they are so much smarter then we are.
If our "leaders" can't take care of things here in America (and they can't), how in the world can we expect them to take care of anything outside of our borders?
This article promotes 'disaster capitalism'; let the EU central bank turn you into a slave or global warming is going to get you. Trump of Clinton or Obomber will do little for global warming, the first will give you nothing, the next 2, ultimately only window dressing. If global warming is the most important issue, Vote Green.
Germany, where the Green Party occupies 10% of the Bundestag seats has made more progress in addressing climate change than the other nations addressed in this article.
There should not be any doubt that if Trump wins the election it is game over for the climate. We will no longer be talking bout staying below 2C but 5C or 6C. That is the blunt reality. For this reason in particular the Sierra Club and every other environmental organization that gets involved in politics that I am aware of are solidly backing Hillary Clinton for president. With regard to the Paris climate agreement the importance of just three countries, the US, China, and India should be emphasized. Together they have about 2 billion people and the US and China have the two largest economies in the world. While China is now the number one polluter by quite a bit and the US is number two, within a couple of decades it is likely that India will be the leading polluter. Together these three countries will account for more than half all emissions from energy. If these three countries can make good progress there is a good chance of some sort of success even though almost 200 countries are involved. Hillary Clinton probably doesn't need the socialist vote to win since it is relatively small but nevertheless in some swing states it could be critical. You never know. This is going to be a tough decision for socialists in swing states. Should they vote for Jill Stein knowing that it the vote could help sink human civilization decades from now or put aside all ideology and vote for the only candidate who believes in climate change and has a realistic chance of winning. There is no good choice for such voters.
Trump is a lunatic.
Hillary is a greedy liar who can't be trusted.
Johnson is a criminal Capitalist.
And the only way to solve our climate problems is to stop burning fossil fuels.
Good day, sir!!!
Yet another climate change article looking to blame politicians and the fossil fuel industry while ignoring the 500 pound gorilla in the room. The animal slaughter industry accounts for half of all greenhouse emissions. The needed action is a drastic curtailment of that industry, made possible by true environmentalists who do not support that industry with their purchases. As this article makes clear, signing agreements is meaningless. Only the people of the earth can save the earth by ending the age of meat. And by eschewing dairy and eggs as well, ending the health care crisis.
I don't normally believe in voting for a candidate out of fear of the others, but with climate change I feel a need for an exception. If Clinton or Trump are elected we are DOOMED!!! Vote Stein.
Ooh, I just can't wait to find out.
Serious question: if big agra did not exist, would we still have this problem?
Except one problem. You are wrong.
The Democratic platform, and Clinton's own campaign policy positions contain a number of proposed actions to address climate change through renewable energy development subsidies. They are not sufficient by themselves, but at least the international consensus on climate change and the importance in addressing it is acknowledged.
Trump's policy position is to deny the existence of climate change and propose specific measures for massive deregulation of all types of oil and coal exploitation. He has also on accasion expressed a desire to abolish the EPA - and for all practical purposes - the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act with it. He will certainly de-list CO2 as a regulated pollutant - something he can do as an agency matter with a single memo for which Congress can do nothing to change.
Yes. Because there would still be Big Detroit, Big Aviation, and Big Suburban Real, Estate, and Big Highway and Airport-Lobbies - all served by Big Oil and Big Coal.
Also, don't small farmers not also raise cattle pigs and chickens, and use tractors, combines and other fossil-fuel powered machinery - burning even more fuel because of reduced efficiency of scale?
The notion that global warming can be addressed by simply becoming vegan is simply infantile nonsense.
I meant if cattle/animals were raised locally and humanely would we have the emissions issue related to raising cattle/animals for food. I know there are other causes.
Go here - and make believe that you never heard of the four persons giving the answers. I suggest placing a vertical piece of tape over the leftmost 20% of the browser window width - then open the link below.
Which one wins clearly wins - in terms of having a clear understanding of the question, stays on-topic in the answers to the questions, and provides answers with specific detailed policy and program proposals?
I stopped reading when the author explained that the British need the EU because ... blah blah blah. The EU Parliament is as much bought and delivered as the US Congress: despite thousands of protests, they are about to sign the TTIP, which will give the industrialist-banking oligarchy the legal right to sue every nation into bankruptcy and serfdom. Obama will do everything he can to get the TTP signed before Clinton moves into the Oval Office. Too bad there won't be a free and fair court to condemn him as a traitor.
Now that the sky hasn't fallen due to Brexit, the Belgian and German movements to exit the EU will grow faster..
Will Trumpism, Brexit, and Geopolitical Exceptionalism Sink the Planet?
NO...but too may imbeciles SINK the planet...